Class war looms as NRMA weighs new voting plan

By Anne LampeSeptember 27 2002

In a move which would drastically tip the balance of control within the NRMA in favour of relatively few corporate members, the road service organisation's board is considering endorsing a proposal that will divide its two million members into two classes.

Under the plan, companies which have car fleets will have votes commensurate with the fleet size.

The proposal was developed over nine months by accountancy group PricewaterhouseCoopers. Work on it started just after last November's rowdy annual general meeting at which half the board kept their seats by the narrowest of margins.

In an organisation where less than 10 per cent of the membership votes, such a concentration of corporate voting power would make it easier for board factions to lobby a few corporate members for proxies that would overwhelm individual members with one vote each.

NRMA deputy president and head of its corporate governance committee Alex Sanchez said that half the board was briefed on the proposal last Monday. The other half did not attend. Mr Sanchez was critical of this non attendance and said the board would discuss the proposal at its next meeting on October 9 with a view to putting it before the November annual general meeting.");document.write("

advertisement

");
}
}
// -->

NRMA director Richard Talbot said: "The Nick Whitlam's Members First group have been planning this since they realised that they were on the nose with many members.

"This change has not been requested by members. It has been instigated by Members First directors."

Former NRMA director and retired road service patrolman Arthur Llewellyn called the proposal "outrageous" and predicted that if adopted it would deliver control of NRMA into the hands of corporate members and the NSW Government, who run the biggest fleets.

"The control of NRMA depends on one vote, one member. The proposal is to move it to one vote one car. It will be just like another shareholder company without being a shareholder company."

Corporate members never attend meetings, he said. "They would just hand over their proxy votes, and we have enough trouble with proxy votes."

Effectively the proposal would change the road service's constitution from voting by members to voting by numbers of cars, but the latter only for corporate members.

Genevieve Rankin, another former director, described the proposal as "just another nail in the coffin" for the NRMA.

"There was talk about it a while ago when I was there and it was dismissed as being undemocratic. You are supposed to have people as members, and not the cars as members. And that still should be the concept."

Mr Talbot said: "The effect will be to put road service into the hands of corporations whose interests will be vastly different from ordinary mum and dad members.

"NRMA was founded on the democratic principle of one man one vote, no matter whether you owned an old VW or 10 Rolls-Royces.

"The proposal is nothing more than a desperate attempt to take control out of the hands of members and deliver it into the hands of corporations."

It also opened the door for fee for service, he said. Corporates would use their bargaining power to negotiate lower membership rates for themselves.